Tonight on my Twitter feed I received 3 images of Child Porn from Bernie supporters.

[trumad]

I hid it and then reported it.

[4dsc]

1. Sound's like a BS report here.

EOM

[TheBlackAdder]

73. Well, in NJ, it's mandatory reporting. People who even accidentally receive Kiddie Porn...

.


Could potentially expose themselves (no pun intended-coundn't find a better term) to criminal inquiry.


.

[auntpurl]

2. The other thread was allowed to stand 5-2.

Let's see how yours does.

[Tavarious Jackson]

3. So did I.

[Demsrule86]

4. Good

The fact they can access such filth is suspicious...should be investigated.

[randome]

5. The kicker to this -to me- is that I had a post hidden in that other thread.

I was described by one of the jurors as one of "the worst-behaved" DUers. I try to see things from other people's point of view but I don't see where that comes from at all. Maybe I'm willfully blind?

Oh, well, enough whining from me. Surely the child porn was captioned with something like: "By the way, I'm a Sanders/Clinton supporter."
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[SwampG8r]

19. Maybe they see you different i know i do

Maybe you say things offhandedly that people find so offensive they cant get it out of their head.
Maybe they are right.

[randome]

21. Anything's possible. I'd appreciate hearing what offensive things I've said, though.

I'm guessing the vitriol, however, is more because I'm often right or, if not right, at least reasonable. DU is a pool of extremes right now, and if you aren't one extreme or the other, then you're unwelcome by a great many. I try to live by the following:
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I don't care about being right. I don't care about being wrong.
I just want to see things for how they really are.[/center][/font][hr]
But I guess everyone says that in one way or another, don't they?

[PufPuf23]

50. You are perceived as self-righteous, see things in black and white, and

act as an apologist for a status quo that values wealth and power and empire over most people.

You arbitrate reality so there is no point in interacting with you unless one already agrees.

If one does not agree with you, they are fringe or unreasonable or wrong.

There are many good Democrats, liberals, and DUers of long term that are intelligent and informed that do not agree with you but you gas light them rather than genuine discussion.

You are welcome.

[randome]

52. Thank you.

I hardly think I support the status quo, though. I don't even like Clinton and I've said that many times. But she clearly is our next President. I don't see that as supporting the status quo, just a recognition of a reality that doesn't need arbitration. It was clear early on -to me, at least- that Sanders would go the way of OWS. Without planning and coalition-building, it always ends this way. With an asterisk.

But ymmv.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[PufPuf23]

64. Thank you for responding in a kind manner.

Just what needs to occur for a Sanders-type candidate or an OWS goals or an antiwar movement or all the other nice things for people and the environment to be successful that are feasible but unlikely under our system?

I supported the Clintons in the 1990s but Hillary Clinton lost my approval post 2001 and I was already in the anyone-but Hillary Clinton contingent in 2008. Plus it seems I have spent 40 years of backing into the less worrisome Democratic candidates for my votes.

Sanders has been unexpected and refreshing and probably destined only to broaden discourse and raise the profile of the many Democrats and liberals that are chronically but justified dis-satisfied.

I supported POTUS Obama and he has been a good but often disappointing and perplexing POTUS. I blame this on that POTUS is a neo-liberal and has appointed mostly neo-liberals and followed neo-liberal policies. Neo-liberal is not a name but has meaning and is not sustainable except by the continuous division of haves and have-nots. Neo-liberal tactics are short term in nature and we are all best served by long term plans and coalitions.

The New Deal worked well for 40 plus years despite always having a strong and committed opposition that ultimately broke the dam of resistance. Cultural and social issues have continued to be more egalitarian since but economic justice has taken a back seat to economic Darwinism and empire. Individuals are left behind just like those excluded or left behind at any time, they are conveniently invisible and powerless. Watching out for those without power and place has always been why I am a Democrat (and have been for 45 years).

[randome]

75. I guess the Internet makes it easy to complain without having to do any socializing or hard work.

Maybe that's why OWS and Sanders failed to catch on. Many were cheering them on but that's about the extent of it. Until large numbers of people actually get in the faces of our do-nothing legislators, nothing will change, imo.

I would like to see things change. I would like to hasten the demise of the GOP, which is rotting away at a snail's pace because the old, angry, white male constituency is losing its numbers and its grip on power. Change will come but never as fast as we want.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[PufPuf23]

80. Wish there were ready answers and solutions.

Kindness goes a long way and is in short supply outside of one's "tribe".

One problem for me is that the policies and methods of the GOP of my youth are now establishment in the Democratic party.

My perception is that the Democratic party establishment wants the anti-war liberals to be de-moralized and give up.

I am not saying the parties are the same.

I don't have the health or energy anymore to be in the streets.

In the 1960s and 1970s or the build up to the invasion in Iraq or OWS or Sanders in 2016, the liberal position brought crowds to the public, more so than the astro-turf of the Tea Party. The one exception was for POTUS Obama in 2008.

I like the idea of term limits and but love the idea of voting out incumbents that don't represent people and have too much personal benefit from public office. Too much time in the bubble seems to corrupt and those already inside don't incorporate new comers or outsiders well.

[Aerows]

89. If you were wondering what the poster was referring to, randome

Here is a perfect example of the digs you throw at anyone who replies to you or questions your bias:

"I guess the Internet makes it easy to complain without having to do any socializing or hard work."

Why do you think I kept posting those show dog pictures? You pretend you have "no dog in the show" every time someone calls you on your biased replies, and then turn right around 3 minutes later and post something that clearly illustrates your bias.

After a while, it gets tiring to interact with someone that repeatedly insults everybody's intelligence by feigning that they are unbiased and :blink blink: innocent as can be.

[Aerows]

90. Look above for a perfect example

of why many share that particular opinion.

[stonecutter357]

6. that should be 10 to 15 years in jail.

[LexVegas]

7. Disgusting. nt

[Bluenorthwest]

8. So you know the people personally with whom you exchanged this material?

You should give their names to the FBI instantly. You should also be ready to explain why you know them.

[Fast Walker 52]

11. yes, and how did you know they were real Bernie supporters?

[randome]

12. This is, I believe, a counter-thread to LuminousAnimals's thread.

It's meant to highlight your very point -how ridiculous it is to claim anyone knows the political background of an anonymous poster on the Internet.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Maru Kitteh]

88. Believe you are likely correct there.

[nc4bo]

9. Question everything. Brock pays a cool million to Clinton trolls.

Sounds like the Brockolettes have been busy.

[Fast Walker 52]

10. yeah, that's what I was thinking

sounds like agent provocateur shit.

[rbrnmw]

69. trumad a paid troll? seriously?

[nc4bo]

71. Did I call Trumad a troll? Show me where I called out his name

Don't make shit up.

[QC]

85. Nobody said anything about him getting paid. n/t

[disillusioned73]

13. LOL..

REALLY??

[Vinca]

14. Well, I hope you also notified the police and are prepared to testify under oath.

[TheSarcastinator]

15. cool story, bro

and I totally believe you.

[betsuni]

16. I received FIVE on my Facebook feed but threw them in the garbage.

This is totally true. I know it was Bernie supporters BECAUSE I JUST KNOW.

[NCTraveler]

17. That is horrible.

Two weeks ago I was called an enabler of pedophilia by a Sanders supporter on this board. They told me they copied my post that showed my support for pedophilia to use against me at a later date. It's just sick what some of them are doing.

[TheFarS1de]

18. Good to see that child porn is now a political football .....

and I thought this election cycle could not get any lower .

[betsuni]

22. And of course this comment won't be alerted on or hidden.

A comment today was hidden for expressing what everyone with half a working brain thinks, directed at someone exposed as a huge obvious documented liar: "Ya, right."

[morningfog]

23. I don't give a shit one way or the other. The op is lying.

And you know it.

[betsuni]

24. It's sarcasm. Yes, the OP is not real and I know it.

[morningfog]

25. It's a lie.

[betsuni]

26. Yes, it's sarcasm.

Please see the post "Tonight on my twitter feed, I received 3 images of child porn from Hillary supporters." We're supposed to mindlessly believe someone saying that Hillary supporters sent them porn. Why? 'Cause they said so?

[Gavile]

30. Well apparently we're supposed to believe anonymous texts are being sent by Bernie supporters

So why not?

[morningfog]

31. I don't care what you believe. But you know this op is a lie.

No sarcasm. A lie.

[randome]

34. All sarcasm is a lie, by the strict definition of the word. So is every novel.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[morningfog]

35. All sarcasm may be a lie, but this is not sarcasm.

It is just an offensive and disturbing lie.

[randome]

37. It was offensive and disturbing to hear the same thing from a Sanders supporter.

With absolutely no explanation as to why it was thought that 'Hillary supporters' was responsible for something like this.

That previous thread sounded more like a child's temper tantrum, only on the Internet.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[morningfog]

40. Well, I guess this OP's lies made it all right?

This thread is just triggering and offensive. It's shameful for you or anyone else to defend it.

[randome]

47. "Triggering" is the first valid argument I've seen on this. I agree, it can be.

Maybe if both authors were to agree to a mutual delete, that might soothe some nerves. But the original thread has too many who are applauding it to make that likely.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[msanthrope]

58. Then you'll call on the original thread for the same? nt

[morningfog]

59. It should be deleted if not true.

I have no idea if the first OP is true, it probably is not. There is no evidence and it sounds suspect. But, this OP, an obvious copy-cat is without a doubt a lie.

[msanthrope]

63. triggering doesn't depend on Truth does it? But the mention? nt

[randome]

60. I don't think you understand how this works, msanthrope.

The first thread was an anti-CLINTON thread. This one is an anti-SANDERS thread. See the difference?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[msanthrope]

65. Yes.....the anti-Clinton thread has a trigger lock. nt

[timmymoff]

36. You sound like a clinton

depends on what your definition of is is . The world is full of dumbasses.

[randome]

38. If this thread is a lie because of no explanation and no evidence, then so was the previous one.

Wouldn't you agree?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[timmymoff]

39. I do not agree with anything from some

crackpot shit stick looking to stir the pot. I hope my language did offend you.

[randome]

44. No, I'm not offended.

It's probably safe to say, however, that those who applauded the previous thread do deserve equal criticism, which they aren't really getting because that thread's supporters are too busy applauding.

I agree the entire subject is in poor taste and the original thread should have been hidden. An agreement for mutual deletion might soothe some nerves, don't you think?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[timmymoff]

45. Your intent was an asshole move

[cherokeeprogressive]

41. So it was simple Tit for Tat? Nothing more substantial than fucking TIT FOR TAT?

Goodness gracious me.

[betsuni]

42. I think fucking TIT for TAT is pretty substantial. And sexy.

[cherokeeprogressive]

46. While I do sport a single tat (kokopelli), I prefer inkless breasts.

[JTFrog]

70. I think you missed a thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511977233

Waiting for your calls of liar over there.


Still waiting.

[pinebox]

27. What's your twitter handle

[NorthCarolina]

51. Nice one.

[BlueLouisville]

28. Show me on the doll where the Sanders fans touched you...

You Clinton folks are really stooping to new lows.

[Red Oak]

29. Probably a false flag BS report

The Clinton antics are sickening to watch

[NorthCarolina]

32. Wow, on MY twitter feed I received hundreds of images of bestiality from Hillary supporters.

I hid it and then reported it. Had it just been regular gay porn I might have followed instead.

[SidDithers]

43. Kick...nt

Sid

[benny05]

48. Twitter Hangover?

I guess I'm less obsessed with Twitter than some around here. I've been on Twitter since late 2006, and my feeds don't show such things. But I'm selective with whom I follow and who follows me.

[ViseGrip]

49. Those are 'hacks' of supporters emails. On FLA news last night! What Hillary camp won't do.

And they resort to porn, to appall voters! Again, supporters emails have been hacked and are sending this crap out. AGAIN, who was in the database first?????????

[BillZBubb]

53. Wow, I used to have some respect for you. Now, nope. Ignore time.

Your Hillary mania has turned you into something not very pleasant.

[PufPuf23]

54. Are you mirroring the other thread or is this real?

I have no way to judge the other thread but if there was an actual police report. If there is not, the other post was vile.

If your post is a rhetorical devise based upon a fabricated event, you are an ugly person and this should be addressed by the Administrators.

[Hiraeth]

62. I am going with your second scenario. Just an educated guess, given this poster's history.

[PufPuf23]

66. The OP is far beyond clever and edgy. eom

[Hiraeth]

68. Headed straight to nasty and belittling of a serious crime, yes.

[JTFrog]

72. Direct reflection of the other thread and you know it.

Or you wouldn't have referenced it.

But you get on with your name calling in this thread while you ignore the other. It's not hypocritical or anything.

[PufPuf23]

76. Obviously I knew the OP was likely in response to the other thread.

I also said, if false, the other thread was vile and there should be a police report (for both if the events really occurred).

Where was my name calling or acting unfair regards the OP?

Can we agree that the OP was inappropriate if untrue? Can we agree the mirrored OP was inappropriate if untrue?

I had an interaction with another poster that had nothing to do with the OP and whether one agrees or not I was sincere.

[JTFrog]

77. Sometimes an OP like this is necessary to prove a point.

And it did a fantastic job of just that judging by the replies.

By the way, calling someone an ugly person, is name calling. And using that line to insinuate that Admins should be informed was just being plain nasty. If you are so interested in the "fairness" of things, why don't you hop into the original thread and name call and threaten to contact Admins there?

[PufPuf23]

81. The method of the OP is not justified nor can it be.

If the OP is false, the poster is way over the line and ugly.

The same goes for the other OP.

If false, neither are appropriate. I would go so far as to opine that if true probably public posting on a message forum is also inappropriate.

I suggested police reports as appropriate and telling in both cases.

This second OP has a context that the other did not. The poster has a pattern of "edgy" posts.

Administration at DU is Administration at DU; I am certain my opinion is of little concern.

[trumad]

84. Love you JT

[PufPuf23]

87. I am glad you reported what you received to Law Enforcement eom

[riversedge]

55. I am glad you reported them.

[Octafish]

56. It shows remarkable generosity.

Some people really are thoughtful. I read on the other thread that they had received two Child Porn images.

[Loudestlib]

57. Child Porn is a serious issue.

If you received Child Porn this is a crime. I am going to alert the FBI and DU site administrators. Hopefully, by working with the authorities we can track down these criminals.

[Hiraeth]

61. ^^^ please do ^^^

[Grassy Knoll]

67. How Terrible...

[MoonRiver]

74. Should be reported to the FBI.

[AgingAmerican]

78. Cool story bro

Gotta suck to be a Hillary supporter sometimes

[cali]

79. Typical trumad bullshit.

[Mnpaul]

86. Who, at 6:12 am, says "tonight on my twitter feed"

Oops

[Omaha Steve]

82. What was the jurisdiction and report #?

It is public record and many of us would like to see a copy!